Filed: Apr. 02, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1723 ALVIN N. BENNETT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CHARLES COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:04-cv-01501-AW) Submitted: March 29, 2007 Decided: April 2, 2007 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alvin N. Bennett, Appellant P
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1723 ALVIN N. BENNETT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CHARLES COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:04-cv-01501-AW) Submitted: March 29, 2007 Decided: April 2, 2007 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alvin N. Bennett, Appellant Pr..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1723 ALVIN N. BENNETT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CHARLES COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge. (8:04-cv-01501-AW) Submitted: March 29, 2007 Decided: April 2, 2007 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Alvin N. Bennett, Appellant Pro Se. Edmund Joseph O’Meally, HODES, ULMAN, PESSIN & KATZ, PA, Towson, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Alvin N. Bennett appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Charles County Public Schools on his Title VII claims of employment discrimination based on race. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e - 2000e-17 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Bennett v. Charles County Pub. Sch., No. 8:04-cv-01501-AW (D. Md. May 25, 2006). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED - 2 -
